am i the only one who find it weird that one doubles player would stand close to the vertical middle line and the other at the left side of the court when their opponent is about to smash, from their perspective (not the opponent's), the left side of the court. they're both right-handed isn't it harder for the person on the right to return the smash if the smash is directed at the outer in/out side box (in for singles, out for doubles) because players almost always return smashes with backhand even with smashes directed to the right side of their body because it's harder to return smashes with forehand.
"in/out side box" are more correctly called 'tramlines'. No, that is not strange at all. The person on the left must cover his side - he is the only one that can. Therefore his partner must move closer to make sure there is not a big gap in 'the channel' (the area between both players). Yes, this will leave more space on the cross-court, but there are (at least) three reasons why this is ok: cross court is the more difficult shot to execute cross court is more risky for the attackers (counter attack on XC is easiest counter), so defending pair are happy to leave this area as least covered compared to straight and channel areas cross court is furthest distance, therefore easiest to defend in some regards.
tramlines...ok that's gonna be useful for me since i've been struggling with badminton lingo. thanks for that could you explain how a cross-court smash is countered? i can only imagine it being countered with a push instead of lift if it's too high.
straight block, straight push, straight shallow lift (probably only if playing down the backhand side of the net person) can all be effective. Sometimes you may find the smasher's net partner over-commits to protecting your straight reply - in which case a cross court block can be effective.
by straight you mean the trajectory of the shuttle right? i.e. the shuttle travels in an almost straight horizontal line
By straight we mean the direction the shuttle travels, where the "trajectory" normally refers to how steep upwards or downwards the shuttle travels (also known as the "angle" of the shuttle). A straight shot or a cross court shot always refers to the direction, NOT the angle/trajectory. To explain about straight shots: If you took the shuttle on the right side of the court (as you look at it), and played it to the right side of the court (as you look at it), then it is a straight shot. Similarly, if you take it on the left and play it to the left. The shuttle does not cross the middle line, so its a straight shot. Normally a straight shot would land near or in the side tramlines. If the shuttle is played from your right, to your left, and crosses the middle line, then it is a cross court shot. So, if your opponent is to your left, both you and your partner should prioritise shots that come to your left, because these will be the fastest (shortest distance) shots by your opponent, and will make it difficult for you to get it "away" from your opponents when you try to play a defensive shot. However, if your opponent plays a shot cross court, it will go to your right, to your forehand side. However, your opponents are on the left. So whilst you are standing closer to the left, your opponents are too. Hence, they are leaving gaps on their right hand side of their court, which you can exploit by playing a fast straight shot. I hope that makes sense, and allows you to understand amletos response. Also note: at an intermediate level and above, the concept of it being more difficult to defend forehand is not true. It is equally easy to defend both forehand and backhand, although many players will choose to learn to play all their defensive shots backhand. Good luck!
that actually makes sense. if i were to return the smashes from my right, even if it's a bad return i.e. not high enough that risks a net kill from the opponent standing in front they will still have to get to their left court to do that. and considering that in offensive position the non-smashing opponent is a little to the side (directly in front of the smasher) he might not get there in time for a net kill unless somehow he knows for sure his partner is going to cross-court smash.
Which is why you should NEVER hit cross court in doubles... which is why YOU should defend the straight shots more carefully than cross court shots.
Never say never... It's not strictly true... for beginners/intermediate level players I guess smashing straight is more likely to create errors/opportunities for them and easier for them to play. But whilst straight smashes will still be the norm for advanced level play, the occasional cross court smash at the body/racquet arm can be very effective - especially if that person has a weaker defense of the two. Also with advanced players the cross court opponent will usually stand closer to the centre line, leaving one side of the court vulnerable to a fast, steep half smash in the tram lines - again very useful.
Whilst what you say is true - there are exceptions, I disagree about the cross court being vulnerable to steep cross court half smashes - they will be punished!
Well exactly, so its not a case of "never play a cross court smash"...! It will only be "punished" if the xcourt smash was not good enough or was the wrong shot to play in that situation. I'm not saying you play that all the time, but use it sparingly, to mix it up and keep the element of surprise. It's quite a well adopted shot amongst international MD to create opportunities, especially as I said, when the xcourt opponent is standing near the centre or very far back. A lot of the top doubles players, LYD, BoMo, Setiawan to name a few, uses the xcourt smash quite a bit either at the body or into the side lines. Look at when LYD was paired with Ko, the amount of times I've seen xcourt smashes aimed at the weaker Ko was unbelievable. Ko is not "weak" defensively but he was certainly a lot weaker and less consistent than LYD, so their opponents just exposed that gap smashing at Ko all the time, and often it was xcourt. You do need a good smash though, and most importantly is accuracy - hence it's not usually recommended for novices.
Depends on positioning buddy. Lets assume Smasher = "A", defenders = "B" and "C" respectively, if "A" is standing on the left when smashing, "B" and "C" will also be defending more towards the left (for b and c - their right hand side), your defense moves in accordance to the position of the smasher. the blindspot that your talking about in the tram lines, as said above is a risky / low percentage shot, and makes way for easy counters
Cross-court shots may be risky. However, it's also because it's risky, the defending pairs may dare you to attack there, and be caught off guard. Esp. if the smasher (along with his front court partner) has vicious straight smashes that the defenders really need to put most if not all concentration to ward off. Situation would be similar to a well disguised drop shot in the middle of furious smashes. Defenders might have to take such a deep defense, and pay 100% on shots coming to them, that they could get caught in front.
I wrote a really long reply to this yesterday, and it didn't save. Lets try again. Whilst I agree that at the highest level, cross court shots are used to exploit weaknesses, that is the important thing to note: they are exploiting a weakness. There is a tactical reason for them to use the cross court shot i.e. their cross court shot is better than the cross court coverage/defence of the opposing pair or player. At a recreational level, this is extremely rare, that the cross court shot will be good enough. However, at any level, if the cross court shots are tactically good choices because of specific opponent weaknesses, then go for it. However, at a professional level, how often do you see a cross court smash aimed at Hendra Setiawan? Not nearly as often as at Ko Sung Hyun! Why? Because tactically it is completely the wrong choice - your cross court shot, which DOES expose your court (as it makes it difficult for net player to become involved in the rally), will likely not be good enough to put pressure on the cross court defender (Setiawan is awesome). So there no point risking it. Finally, whilst I appreciate given everything I just said and you yourself correctly pointed out, that cross court shots (specifically smashes) do have a place in doubles, I would still always advise that the main problem with all recreational players is that they look to hit cross court far too much, rather than building pressure by playing straight. Hence, whenever someone asks, I will always tell them to hit straight. Because if they are asking me, they probably aren't high level competitive players, who know what they are doing anyway. Good luck to all!
I think that can all agree that, against competent opposition, a x-court smash/fast drop tends to be a low-percentage option. There's a risk it'll go out, it's got a relatively long way to travel, the opposition will intercept closer to the net etc. In my experience, recreational (and even some league) players tend to defend x-court too wide, leaving a big (inviting) gap between the defenders. There are a few situations where x-court smash is worth considering. For example, if the x-court defender is struggling to recover from lifting the shuttle, they may be vulnerable. The smasher's partner needs to be aware of the opportunity & can consider standing on the other side of the center-line, hinting to the smasher to go x-court.
Yeah I agree with most of that. But it does depend on a lot of factors as you rightly said and whilst it may be a low-percentage shot if you're expecting a winner, it can be effective at producing a weak return that you can capitalise on. The key is accuracy, knowing when to play it and to have a fast and clever net partner. Usually, in my experience a good cross court smash played to the racquet elbow/armpit of the opponent often creates a weak return. Particularly when that opponent is standing closer to the centreline unlike the players you described above.
At least two points I like here - 1. Observation that lower level players tend to have an incorrect defensive side-side position. This invites attack to the center as the gap is much bigger. Also, for the same reason, a straight smash closer to the tramline could also pay dividend. Cross-court in this case is probably a moot point, esp. smasher probably is at the same level, and lack disguise, speed and accuracy of smash. 2. Involvement of the net player - he doesn't always have to stay straight ahead of the smasher. E.g. in XD, if you know the opposing lady (usually in X-court position) is weaker in skill/defense, you can simply smash at her. Your lady partner can also stand X-court front waiting for such a X-court smash. Every move can be obvious, and there could be nothing opposing lady could do about it. This can also extend to MD at lower level. That would be a contrast/comparison of relative strength. But I guess we're off-topic here.
